Even More Than This: "David Barton's Historical Hallucinations"

I've been planning to write an article about David Barton, but I'm enjoying what others are coming out with and want to share some of it with you now:

We have staked the whole future of all our political constitutions upon the capacity of each of ourselves to govern ourselves according to the moral principles of the Ten Commandments. – Falsely attributed to James Madison

The highest glory of the American Revolution was this: It connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity. - Falsely attributed to John Quincy Adams

It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible - Falsely attributed to George Washington

I have always said and always will say that the studious perusal of the Sacred Volume will make us better citizens. - Falsely attributed to Thomas Jefferson

It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. - Falsely attributed to Patrick Henry

via "David Barton's Historical Hallucinations," by digby | Hullabaloo

Look, I'm a Christian, and I have to tell you that anyone who has truly studied the history of the US in any detail or depth definitely knows that the US was not, I repeat, was not founded as a Christian nation.

There were plenty of people in the US professing Christianity, but the government of the US was not and is not Christian and was never intended to be.

The top "Founding Fathers" were for the most part Freemasons, which is anti-Christian in that it runs directly opposed to Jesus's admonition concerning Jesus being the one and only path to God the Father. Freemasons accept as their "brothers" those who are decidedly not Christians and say so openly. Christians never leave room for that in terms of "brotherhood" on that level — brothers in the flesh, yes, but not brothers in the spirit, which is what Freemasonry is alleging.

Thomas Jefferson was an atheist as far as I can tell. I had once thought he was merely a Deist, but now I believe he didn't believe in anything metaphysical, although I'm open to being disabused of that. I do realize he wrote things that taken alone would suggest he believed in God.

Certainly Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Paine were Deists. George Washington was in my view the highest ranking Freemason who ever lived. He was considered, and still is, the Father of Our Country (or Nation). Many, many others were Freemasons and Deists, not Christians — professing or otherwise.

The whole governmental structure of the US is anti-Christian. The Enlightenment Era was anti-Christian, and the founders were men of the Enlightenment. The government is decidedly secular. The "separation of church and state" may have been called a wall by Jefferson, but the Constitution certainly makes clear that Christianity is not, repeat, is not the established religion of the US — the US has no established religion.

Many Baptists and others by the way celebrate that separation, as they believe that without it, the state would come to persecute them.

I believe that Christianity is the right way or path. It includes, by definition, that it is not coerced but rather given and accepted by God and the believer respectively. The David Bartons of the world, however, think they have been given the right from God and Jesus to force people. They are completely wrong and do not know how to read the Gospels. They are as wrong as the John Hagee types who falsely believe that Jesus is a Political Zionist. The idea is preposterous.

Here are some names and terms that I ran into here (Barton's Deepening Dominionism | Right Wing Watch, People For the American Way [not a blanket endorsement]): Jim Garlow, Ed Silvoso, Dutch Sheets, Hope Taylor, Newt Gingrich, Mike Huckabee; Seven Mountains Dominionist/New Apostolic Reformation movement; The Federation of Ministers and Churches International; International Leadership Embassy.

These people are exactly the people I've written against for years and years. They have the entire concept of Christianity totally wrong. They are capitalists while real Christians are communists (not Marxist though). Jesus was and is a communist, not a capitalist. The capitalists love to take parables out of the full context of all of Jesus's sayings and doings in a foolish attempt to support the unsupportable notion that Jesus preached capitalism. I've had some of them try to argue for that on this blog. They never return after I show them the actual context that makes a mockery of their ignorant position.

Now, that "Right Wing Watch" article mentions "imprecatory prayers." I have to tell you that such prayers run diametrically opposed to Jesus's teaching to his closest disciples not to, again, not to call down the wrath. Those who call down the wrath, which is what an imprecatory prayer does, are praying to Satan for wrath and not to the spirit of whom God is.

And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did? But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. And they went to another village. (Luke 9:54-56)

...not come to destroy men's lives, but to save. However, the "right-wingers" pray for the destruction of men's lives. I tell you they are of the spirit of Satan, plainly and clearly. Are you listening to me, Mike Huckabee? Repent!

Those self-styled Christians are Old Testament. They do not understand the New Commandment and the fulfillment/enhancement of the law. Moses did not know what Jesus knew and knows. Pay attention to why it's a New Covenant. The so-called conservative-Republican Christians may as well have never heard of Jesus for all the things they do and promote.


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe

  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.